• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Illegal immigrant jailed and her son was put up for adoption. 2 years later...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cloudy

Banned
http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/12/20/missouri.immigrant.child/index.html?hpt=C2

The boy has two names.

His biological mother calls him Carlitos, but he's Jamison to the couple that adopted him.

The two sides are locked in a heart-wrenching legal fight over custody of the 4-year-old boy. He's caught between federal immigration and state adoption laws -- and between two families. But the Missouri Supreme Court will soon decide his fate.

The court could keep him with his adoptive parents, Seth and Melinda Moser, a couple from Carthage, Missouri, who have raised the boy since shortly before his second birthday. The Mosers say they played by the rules in adopting the boy and have provided him with a loving, stable home.

Or the court could return the boy to his biological mother, a native of Guatemala who says she never agreed to her son's adoption. She was separated from her son when he was about 6 months old after federal agents imprisoned her as an illegal immigrant who used a stolen Social Security number to work at a poultry processing plant.


Seth Moser says he and his wife are the only parents the boy has ever known. They heard him speak his first words and watched him take his first steps.

"God has given us a little boy and the responsibility of taking care of him and loving him, and that's all we've done since the first day we've had him," he says.

"It's almost like preparing for someone in your family to die," he says. "How do you explain to your 4-year-old that there's an issue and that he has to go with this other person he doesn't even know?"

The boy speaks English, like the Mosers. His biological mother, Encarnacion Bail Romero, speaks Spanish.

She didn't see her son during her nearly two years behind bars, but the boy is her flesh and blood, she argues. She says her child was taken away without her consent. How can a court not allow her to get her child back, she asks?

"I was very worried about my son, and today I'm still desperate," she says in Spanish. "I want to be with my son."

The federal government plans to deport Bail Romero to Guatemala, where her two other children live, but authorities have put the process on hold until the courts resolve the question of her son's custody.


The Mosers soon asked a judge for temporary custody, says their lawyer, Richard Schnake. Bail Romero -- in prison at the time -- did not contact the Mosers or their attorney or object to them having custody, he says.

"I didn't know who that family was," she says.

Bail Romero says she did not fully understand what was going on and certainly did not give her blessing for them to adopt her son.

After a judge granted the Mosers temporary custody, they waited a year -- rather than the six-month minimum stipulated by Missouri law -- before asking to adopt the boy, Schnake says.

In October 2008, a judge approved the adoption, ruling that Bail Romero had abandoned her child by not trying to contact the Mosers for a year. Bail Romero says that's because she doesn't speak English and was left with no way to ask for help to plead her side.

In addition to the clergy couple not having the authority to put up her son for adoption, Riojas has argued that Bail Romero was deprived of due process because she had no consular access or access to legal documents in her language. He also says an attorney who represented her at one point did not represent her well.

After the adoption went through, the Mosers legally changed the boy's name to Carlos Jamison Moser.


In February 2009, however, Bail Romero got out of prison and started fighting to regain custody. An appeals court sided with her in July. It concluded that the adoption was invalid.

The Missouri high court heard arguments in the case in November.

More in link...

I am really torn on this. Is it fair to the biological parent to have her child just taken away from her? On the other hand, is it fair to the child to be uprooted from the only family he's ever known?
 
God has given us a little boy

Soooo not true.

edit: not a religious thing it should be noted. Fine if the mother was unfit or something but she was trying to earn a living (probably to support her child). I hope the boy, and those involved realise that he will only ever have one biological mother and that any othr bond he forms with any other family simply will not be the same.
 

user_nat

THE WORDS! They'll drift away without the _!
Could always try the Solomon method and see if either side is willing to have half the kid.

Hard situation though. I think at this point he should stay with the adopted parents. They are the only parents he has ever known. Plus they speak the same language.

I don't think it would be fair for the actual mother, but to me it seems better for the boy.
 
I think it should be up to the adopted parents, but I hope they give the child back to the mother.

You can always adopt another child (in fact it is a great thing to do), but the biological mother can't just forget her son and have another one.
 

Alucrid

Banned
user_nat said:
Could always try the Solomon method and see if either side is willing to have half the kid.

Hard situation though. I think at this point he should stay with the adopted parents. They are the only parents he has ever known. Plus they speak the same language.

We just need Obama, a throne and a sword.

CrocMother said:
I think it should be up to the adopted parents, but I hope they give the child back to the mother.

You can always adopt another child (in fact it is a great thing to do), but the biological mother can't just forget her son and have another one.

Still, after caring for their son for two years, wouldn't it be equally as hard on the Mosers? I mean, you talk about it so casually like they can just go to the store and pick out another.

It's a bitch of a decision. On one hand the adoption was illegal without the biological mothers consent. On the other hand you have this couple who have taken care of the kid for two years and could possibly provide a better future for him. Well shit. This one's tough. More than likely the biological mother will win.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Hard situation though. I think at this point he should stay with the adopted parents. They are the only parents he has ever known. Plus they speak the same language.

But he's not their kid and a court has already ruled the adoption illegal
 
CrocMother said:
I think it should be up to the adopted parents, but I hope they give the child back to the mother.


Are you kidding? Granted the adoptive parents didn't do anything wrong and it sucks for them that they'd have to lose a child they bonded with, bu the mother effectively had her son stolen from her. Giving her back her son is the only right thing to do. The punishment for using a fake social security number or being an illegal immigrant is not that you lose your children.
 
One could say that if she wasn't here illegally, then none of this would've happened. But at the same time, you could easily argue that she also didn't voluntarily give her son up for adoption either. Ultimately, since it's only been 2 years and if she's not become a naturalized (or in the process of becoming) US Citizen, then she should be able to get her son back & then be deported back to her country of origin.
 

antonz

Member
Cloudy said:
But he's not their kid and a court has already ruled the adoption illegal

Sometimes you have to look at whats best for the kid. His biological mother doesnt even speak english which he has been raised too. He has spent his entire youth with his adoptive parents.

It doesnt matter if you tell him that woman you cant even understand over there is your mom. He is gonna have his attachment to the family that raised him
 

Lost Fragment

Obsessed with 4chan
Hydranockz said:
The adoption agency gave them the child. Not the miracle of birth.

Pretty sure they're aware of that.

Not sure what your point is, unless it's "religious people can't think God meant for something to happen unless it happened this way or this way," which is pretty silly.
 
Ninja Scooter said:
Are you kidding? Granted the adoptive parents didn't do anything wrong and it sucks for them that they'd have to lose a child they bonded with, bu the mother effectively had her son stolen from her. Giving her back her son is the only right thing to do. The punishment for using a fake social security number or being an illegal immigrant is not that you lose your children.

I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.
 

DonMigs85

Member
CrocMother said:
I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.
You know, I have to agree... if the biological mother was truly selfless and cared about her child's future, she should let him stay with the Mosers.
 
CrocMother said:
I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.


so we are taking away people's kids if they are broke or don't have jobs? Is that the precedent you want to set?
 

Cloudy

Banned
antonz said:
Sometimes you have to look at whats best for the kid. His biological mother doesnt even speak english which he has been raised too. He has spent his entire youth with his adoptive parents.

It doesnt matter if you tell him that woman you cant even understand over there is your mom. He is gonna have his attachment to the family that raised him

I understand but as hard as it may be for the kid and the adoptive parents, you don't want to set a precedent where people's babies can just be taken from them with no waiver of parenthood
 
How about the adoptive parents keep the kid and the biological mother work in the home as a nanny? NBC could then make a crappy TV show about it that gets canceled midway through the season.
 
DonMigs85 said:
So, I'm guessing the Mosers are infertile?


Don't know, does it honestly matter? Yes, they could have their own child if it were possible, but let's be honest here: Millions of children from around the world would love to be given a chance to have a better life here in the US than in their native country. It's hard to condemn them to their life with a "Sucks to be you, but the folks in the US have decided to have kids on their own. lulz" attitude.
 
Jamesfrom818 said:
How about the adoptive parents keep the kid and the biological mother work in the home as a nanny? NBC could then make a crappy TV show about it that gets canceled midway through the season.

Olivia Munn as the nanny? She looks exotic enough to pull it off!
 

user_nat

THE WORDS! They'll drift away without the _!
Cloudy said:
I understand but as hard as it may be for the kid and the adoptive parents, you don't want to set a precedent where people's babies can just be taken from them with no waiver of parenthood
What else where they meant to do with the baby whilst she was in jail for 2 years?
 

Nekofrog

Banned
How are you going to give a kid who only speaks english, and has known nothing but the life he lives now, to a woman who is (was?) an illegal who cannot even communicate with her own son.

AND HE'S FOUR.

That's going to work out just great.
 

Cloudy

Banned
CrocMother said:
I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.

But it's HER son!
 
Child should go back to the biological mother. I'm sorry, but if I was in that situation, I would do whatever was necessary to get my child back.

user_nat said:
What else where they meant to do with the baby whilst she was in jail for 2 years?

Regular foster home care? They essentially gave her child away.
 
CrocMother said:
I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.
Have you been to Missouri?
 

Amory

Member
Ninja Scooter said:
Are you kidding? Granted the adoptive parents didn't do anything wrong and it sucks for them that they'd have to lose a child they bonded with, bu the mother effectively had her son stolen from her. Giving her back her son is the only right thing to do. The punishment for using a fake social security number or being an illegal immigrant is not that you lose your children.

Can we at least send them back to Guatemala? Or is that not the punishment either?
 

DonMigs85

Member
DiatribeEQ said:
Don't know, does it honestly matter? Yes, they could have their own child if it were possible, but let's be honest here: Millions of children from around the world would love to be given a chance to have a better life here in the US than in their native country. It's hard to condemn them to their life with a "Sucks to be you, but the folks in the US have decided to have kids on their own. lulz" attitude.
We need more Angelina Jolies
 
user_nat said:
What else where they meant to do with the baby whilst she was in jail for 2 years?


plenty of people's kids get put in foster care/protective custody while their parents (who do far worse shit) are incarcerated. When I did social work I saw parents who were fucking crackheads, armed robbers, wife beaters, ect...who got their kids back after a while. They don't go taking their kids and throwing them into adoption, never to be seen again. That shit is just wrong by any measure.
 

Cloudy

Banned
user_nat said:
What else where they meant to do with the baby whilst she was in jail for 2 years?

Foster home? Actually pretend to care about what little rights this woman has and get her consent for adoption? You can't just take someone's baby :lol
 

antonz

Member
Ninja Scooter said:
so we are taking away people's kids if they are broke or don't have jobs? Is that the precedent you want to set?

Technically that happens everyday. Unfit living conditions etc lead to kids being taken away by the state and put into the system
 

Iksenpets

Banned
I feel for the mother, but it's not fair to the boy to uproot him from all he's ever known for his mother's sake. This is a tragedy, but the damage is done and I think we all have to live with it. There's no good way to end this, but I think he's got to stay.

EDIT: Just saw that the kid is still a toddler. In that case, it may be possible to relocate him to the biological mother without too much lasting harm to him. If that's the case, then he should be relocated to his biological mother. Still, insanely tough decision. It really all hinges on whatever the child development experts say about how easy it would be to relocate a child that age without traumatizing him.
 
CrocMother said:
I think the adopted parents have the child's best interests at heart. This woman just got out of jail, does she have a job? Can she support her son?

The opportunities the child has in Missouri as opposed to Guatemala are day and night.
Bam. My thoughts exactly. I feel for the biological mother, I really do, but would the child be better off with someone who just got out of jail or a family?
 
antonz said:
Technically that happens everyday. Unfit living conditions etc lead to kids being taken away by the state and put into the system


lol how often do you think that honestly actually happens? There isn't enough resources to put every poor/mistreated kid in foster care system. Sad but true.
 

trinest

Member
I think- in this situation- he should stay with the parents who adopted him.

For the simple fact his age- if he was older and had a considerable amount of time with the original parent- then yeah- but at this stage its pretty much like giving a random baby to someone else.
 

DonMigs85

Member
Iksenpets said:
I feel for the mother, but it's not fair to the boy to uproot him from all he's ever known for his mother's sake. This is a tragedy, but the damage is done and I think we all have to live with it. There's no good way to end this, but I think he's got to stay.

EDIT: Just saw that the kid is still a toddler. In that case, it may be possible to relocate him to the biological mother without too much lasting harm to him. If that's the case, then he should be relocated to his biological mother.
Yeah, not that I agree with taking kids away like this, but it would be pretty damaging to the child if they took him back at this point.
 
Ninja Scooter said:
plenty of people's kids get put in foster care/protective custody while their parents (who do far worse shit) are incarcerated. When I did social work I saw parents who were fucking crackheads, armed robbers, wife beaters, ect...who got their kids back after a while. They don't go taking their kids and throwing them into adoption, never to be seen again. That shit is just wrong by any measure.
Yep.

trinest said:
I think- in this situation- he should stay with the parents who adopted him.

For the simple fact his age- if he was older and had a considerable amount of time with the original parent- then yeah- but at this stage its pretty much like giving a random baby to someone else.

Thats essentially what they did to the birth mother.
 
trinest said:
I think- in this situation- he should stay with the parents who adopted him.

For the simple fact his age- if he was older and had a considerable amount of time with the original parent- then yeah- but at this stage its pretty much like giving a random baby to someone else.


LOL it's not a random baby it's HER SON. Her flesh and blood that she carried in her womb and never had any intention of giving up for adoption. Her baby was stolen from her and it's like "Oh well too late finders keepers!"
 

Cloudy

Banned
Thinking about it some more, there is NO WAY the courts can side with the Mosers in this case. It would have MAJOR implications on case law
 

DonMigs85

Member
Ninja Scooter said:
LOL it's not a random baby it's HER SON. Her flesh and blood that she carried in her womb and never had any intention of giving up for adoption. Her baby was stolen from her and it's like "Oh well too late finders keepers!"
I'd hate to be that kid though, going from a nice suburban American home with nice toys and food to some shanty in Guatemala.
Hopefully the mother can find it in her heart to make a selfless decision to go with what's best for the kid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom